Why Amber Rudd is wrong to attack WhatsApp and put us all at security risk

And if Amber Rudd gets her way and the security services obtain 'backdoor' access to such apps, the stark reality is that millions of Britons will actually become more vulnerable rather than safer.

She is either being incredibly naive or incredibly stupid.

Now, there is a lot more that big tech companies like Google, Facebook, Twitter and others could be doing such as taking more responsibility for the content published on their respective platforms.

But abolishing the total security of end-to-end encryption is not one of them.

End-to-end encryption gives people vital protection that is needed in the digital age to secure all sorts of confidential and private information.

It is used for online shopping, banking, as well as for communicating.

Once you create a backdoor for the security services to gain access then you remove the safety barrier.

That well-trodden phrase 'if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear' in this context is complete rubbish.

Why? Because once you create that backdoor, end-to-end encryption becomes vulnerable to anyone who wants to exploit it as a loophole or flaw in the system whether it be Russian hackers or cyber criminal gangs.

Encryption is not there to hide things from the security and intelligence services – it is there to protect our most sensitive information.

I appreciate MI5 couldn't care less about the gossip, scandal or intimacy of my private affairs – but for other unscrupulous groups it is a goldmine for extortion and exploitation.

Hacking and cyber crime is the major threat we all face every single day.

No-one is immune to it and it is time we all woke up to that fact.

We need to take our digital and online security seriously.

And that is why we cannot allow this metaphorical backdoor to be created – even for the security services.

It would be like constructing a new physical doorway in everyone's home but saying everything is fine because only the local police force has the keys.

How would you feel about that?

At any time of the day or night a police officer could unlock that door and come into your house to look around and take whatever he or she liked without warning.

You may have nothing nefarious to hide but are you still ok with that?

And even if you are that still doesn't stop every rogue in the neighbourhood from trying the handle or attempting to pick the lock. It is only so long before one of them gets lucky.

And then what happens if the police lose the keys or misplace them?

Do you trust them to take care of it?

Do you still feel safe?

Rather than suggesting proper and constructive ways of combatting terrorism, Miss Rudd has embarked on a shameless and draconian power-grab using the tragic deaths of four innocent people as justification.

There is, however, a major flaw with Miss Rudd's argument and logic when citing last month's Westminster attack.

The power to access to end-to-end encrypted messaging apps would not have stopped Khalid Masood and his horrific attack on Westminster Bridge and the House of Parliament.

The Prime Minister told the country that Masood was not on the security services’ radar.

He had been in the past but was a 'periphery' figure.

He was not being monitored.

So even if MI5 and GCHQ could have intercepted his WhatsApp messages before the attack – they would not have done so because he was not of interest to them.

In fact, just weeks before the attack I spoke to the new head of the West Midlands Counter Terrorism Unit – the regional body that fights terrorism across the heart of the country and the second busiest unit of its kind.

I asked Chief Superintendent Matthew Ward whether he thought he needed more powers to deal with getting hold of information held by tech companies.

This is what he told me: "Terrorists will always evolve their methods of communicating to further their terrorist ambitions.

"I can only judge on our past and we have been able to thwart a number of attacks that have been planned in the UK. That tells me our capabilities have been sufficient.

"But as the terrorists continue to evolve, advance, and change their ways of operating, we need to be able to do the same.

"Everything I have seen tells me we are on track but it is a constant battle to ensure terrorists do not get one step ahead of us."

So if the police and security services' powers hitherto have been sufficient and encrypted messaging was not relevant to Westminster – why the fuss?

Is Miss Rudd covering up for the failings of the security services – after all this is a man they missed – or is she trying to revive previously failed plans for greater Government snooping?

Worryingly, she seems oblivious to the danger it could cause for millions of Britons whatever her true motive.